The Osaka District Court judgment on the Case 3 has been uploaded to the lawsuit materials section.

 The plaintiff does not intend to appeal, so the Case 3 is to be closed soon.

 Please pay attention to the coming judgement of November 26, 2025, on the Case 2 at the Tokyo High Court.

The verdict was handed down at the Osaka District Court on September 30, 2025.

 All of the plaintiff's claims were dismissed.

 The judgment will be uploaded to the litigation materials section of CALL4 after masking and other procedures are completed.

 Please wait a moment.

September 17, 2025

 The fourth oral argument for Lawsuit 2 was held.

 The government submitted Preparatory Document 5, and the appellant submitted rebuttal documents (Preparatory Documents 4 and 5).

 The argument was concluded.

 The verdict will be announced at 1:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 26, 2025.

 Attention, please.

2025/4/26

 We submitted a new document to the Supreme Court yesterday. The title of the document is "Correction of Reasons and Supplement of Statements: Regarding the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Convention on the Rights of the Child".

 Previous court rulings have echoed the government's argument, holding that the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of Japanese nationality (the right to retain Japanese nationality) is not guaranteed by the Constitution.

 However, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Japan has ratified, contain articles that guarantee this right.

 This document adds to that point and emphasizes it to the Supreme Court judges.

 It has been published in the litigation documents section . It is a short and simple document. Please read it. Thank you!

 2024/12/21

 The following documents submitted to the Supreme Court have been made public in the litigation documents section.

 1. Statement of grounds for appeal (explaining the errors in the Fukuoka High Court ruling and the unconstitutionality of Article 11, paragraph 1 of the Nationality Law) and its summary

 2. Statement of grounds for appeal (explaining that the Fukuoka High Court ruling is contrary to the Supreme Court precedents and etc.) and its summary

 3. 13 supplementary documents

 4. Explanation of Evidence

The materials from the report meeting held following the appellate court ruling in Lawsuit 1 have been made public.

[CASE 1] Appeal Court Judgment Date Report Meeting Materials (2nd installment)_20241012

The High Court ruling on Lawsuit 1 has been made public.

[Lawsuit 1] 20241010 High Court ruling

In addition, the Lists evidence explanation documents submitted in Lawsuit 1 have been made public for both the district court and the high court.

District Court

[Lawsuit 1] District Court/Evidence Explanation (1)

[Lawsuit 1] District Court/Evidence Explanation (2)

[Lawsuit 1] District Court/Evidence Explanation (3)

[Lawsuit 1] District Court/Evidence Explanation (4)

[Lawsuit 1] District Court/Evidence Explanation (5)

[Lawsuit 1] District Court/Evidence Explanation (6)

[Lawsuit 1] District Court/Evidence Explanation (7)

High Court

[Litigation 1] Explanation of evidence - High Court (1)

[Litigation 1] Evidence Explanation - High Court (2)

[Litigation 1] Explanation of evidence - High Court (3)

1. Documents, etc.

 The appellant submitted a statement of grounds for appeal (February 15, 2024), and the appellee (the government) filed a rebuttal to the statement.

 A reply was submitted (June 18, 2024).

 In response to this, the appellant submitted;

 Preparatory document (1) ; Rebuttal to the Rebuttal

 Preparatory document (2) ; Additional arguments

 ①Framework of the Grand Bench decision on unconstitutionality on October 26, 2023

 ② Inconsistency between past Supreme Court rulings and Article 11, Paragraph 1 of the Nationality Act

 3) Asahi Shimbun Survey: "Thinking about dual nationality"

 ④ Commentary on important precedents in FY2023 by Professor Kazuhiko Matsumoto and Professor Akiko Tateda

 Preparatory document (3) ; Additional investigation results (past information on the Ministry of Justice website)

 However, the respondent (the government) did not respond in any way.

 The appellant also submitted a request for witness testimony and a request for the commission of delivery of documents. Both requests were rejected.

 2. Statement of the appellant's own opinion

 3. Conclusion

 The trial concluded, and the date for the judgement to be announced was set for Thursday, October 10th at 1:25 p.m.

 20240713 Report meeting materials.pdf

1. Plaintiff’s Preparatory Brief (3) has been submitted.

　This document argues that Article 11, paragraph 1 of the Nationality Law does not apply when a legal representative carries out the procedure for a minor to acquire foreign nationality. We also submitted the minutes of the Diet etc. as evidence.

　A statement from the plaintiff's mother was read by her attorney, in which she argued that it would be cruel to apply Article 11, Paragraph 1 of the Nationality Act to the plaintiff, her son.

　In addition, the plaintiffs' legal team made a statement regarding the unconstitutionality of Article 11, Paragraph 1 of the Nationality Act.

 2. The trial concluded today.

　The next date will be the verdict date. (October 17, 2024, from 1:15 p.m.) 

Based on the results of the investigation commissioned to Setagaya Ward, the plaintiff requested a further investigation commission.

The defendant is to submit a statement of opinion on this matter by July 8th, and the court will decide whether to issue an investigation request based on the contents of that statement.

At the next court date, the plaintiff will submit written arguments outlining her claim for state compensation accusing a failure of the government's system design.